Hmmm. I don't mean to add controversy, because I agree in a purely ethical sense harming animals for silly decorations like piercing or tattoos is stupid.

That being said, my Betta fish has such a long unnatural tail that he chews it off himself and there is nothing I have found to stop him. I barely disturb the water because mild current stresses him out. If I had realized how miserable my fish would be I would have bought a more natural Betta fish like a Plakat variety with less finnage.

My dog is a basset hound and has dwarfism. So far my dog is healthy but I realize this genetic variation bred into him could pose a multitude of risks to his health. I also own a rescue mutt who has lots of health issues, go figure.

I have injected both dogs with a homing device with a huge piercing needle and tattooed horses before who were important to identify. Just saying, in many cases we get used to in-humane practices that suit us, but get angry at the practices of others by rationalizing.

Those pictures of the goldfish are well over 10 years old, I remember seeing the picture/article back I high school on BME's website. This was done by a professional piercer, all the same procedures/precautions he takes with his human clients were taken with the fish. The fish was mildly sedated to prevent any injury and its through the cartilage of the mouth where there are no nerve endings. He reported that it healed just fine and did not effect the fishes ability to swim or eat, it was later removed.

There has been no one else since who has attempted this to the best of my knowledge and is not a common practice. So there is no need to get all up on arms about this.

Also dragging sports fishing into this is a whole other ball of wax that has its own set of " acceptable ethics" that differs greatly from the way you'd treat pet fish. I think the lines are neon blurred a little to much.

Those pictures of the goldfish are well over 10 years old, I remember seeing the picture/article back I high school on BME's website. This was done by a professional piercer, all the same procedures/precautions he takes with his human clients were taken with the fish. The fish was mildly sedated to prevent any injury and its through the cartilage of the mouth where there are no nerve endings. He reported that it healed just fine and did not effect the fishes ability to swim or eat, it was later removed.

There has been no one else since who has attempted this to the best of my knowledge and is not a common practice. So there is no need to get all up on arms about this.

I think it's irrelevant whether this was done 'under sedation by a professional piercer'. Why do this at all???? The circumstances under which a fish was pierced does not justify doing it at all.

20/20 had an episode not long ago featuring people's desire to 'transform' their pets with piercings, tattoos, facelifts, testicle implants, etc. This is actually becoming a lot more widespread than you may realize. New York has impending legislation banning these practices because it's become such a widespread problem.

The topic of this thread is fish piercing, not fishing or dying or tatooing. Off topic post will be eliminated and if the thread doesn't stay on topic it will be closed. Please keep your post relavent to the topic at hand!

__________________

__________________

"Listen to some of these guys talk, and it's like they were born from their momma's belly with a fishkeeping encyclopedia in one hand and an API kit in the other" (unrevealed).